SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Non-Tech : Wit Capital - The way of the future? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: rdmsqito who wrote (6051)7/2/1999 11:51:00 AM
From: eDollar.com  Respond to of 16809
 
rmsquito, I always thought that there was big RISK for stamp. But this big risk comes with big reward. This is what I wrote on the day od Stamps pricing.
Message 10265877

I should have convinced the thread a bit more.



To: rdmsqito who wrote (6051)7/2/1999 11:59:00 AM
From: Topannuity  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 16809
 
Maybe we need to review which factors were common for those IPOs which FAILED (not those which succeeded, since those seem less defined) and then avoid only IPOs which have qualities in common with those which failed.

Some possibilities:
Large float
BNBN and TWE are examples. Now, ICCIA is available at DLJ with a float of 20,000,000. Should we categorically avoid it? Yet, GS had a float of 69,000,000.

No distinctive product or brand or idea.
Example: NETO, which offers a product that competes (poorly) with MS Frontpage

Late entrant into a crowded field
Example: Flycast (FCST), fighting an uphill battle with DCLK. Or BNBN fighting AMZN
Yet, CARI which is competing with HLTH has performed well. Maybe, because HLTH's is still in an embroyonic stage of development and has not captured its niche yet, which gives CARI room to compete and succeed. Whereas, BNBN's battle for market share against AMZN is a more difficult fight. Same for FCST or NETO in their respective niches.

Okay guys, please post more input along this line of thinking....